The future or end of AP Play?

This post is all about the future of AP play, and the strange lack in the industry of a truly open policy on arguably AP play. It is also about your thoughts on what an AP player would do if such a quicker transition were to happen. It is long, but interesting.

An idea came to me about the future of casino AP play, and this whole cat-and-mouse game of AP play that is a bit of wart on the gaming industry on both sides. This comes from the huge divide I see on this board between “gaming factions.” Let me say that upfront, and as a casino pit worker, the casino operators are also not fully on the level on this issue, too, like there is a sense of some denial or avoidance on open policies that address “grey-area AP play.” You can quote me on this. What I don’t get is that while card-counting and hole-carding and other “grey area” AP is fully a casino offense within the table games pit, it is also a strange “Robin Hood world of valiant endeavor” on the gambling forums. I mean, players get backed off, trespassed, and detained in real life, while in Internet-land, there is this whole romanticized “we are the valiant good guys,” for what is considered by others outside of these boards to be scheming, if not cheating.

As a result, there is a big chasm between many customers and the operators on this issue in this industry. I will admit this issue is met with silence and avoidance on the part casino operators in terms of openness. I agree with many here, that there isn’t any sort of public policy or acknowledgment of the issue, that is, aside from back-offs, flat-betting, walk-offs and detentions of real players that happen in real casino life.

When you look at this divide, it is one of the stranger aspects of gaming. I’m hard-pressed to think of another industry that has such a customer-to-supplier mistrust among a large portion of the customers.
And I feel we are slowly heading in the direction of an inevitable end to AP play somewhere along the line on this issue. There was a period of a card-counting “days of heaven” period that changed into a mid-level grind for fine counters in the current period, and where an exceptional counter like Nathaniel Tilton could live very large for a just few years, for one hell of a chapter in his life. If the same counter had plied his trade 25 years earlier, or even 10, he would have been a lot richer, and for a lot longer. And this guy really got into his “financial planner by day – casino killer by night!” kind of thing.

Now, and as a hypothetical question, what would you do, as an avowed AP Player, if overnight the Gaming Commission unilaterally imposed on ALL casino operators that ALL Blackjack games must be made impossible to count? Think about this in your life. Specific and strict guidelines to drop into place on some hypothetical cut-off date, not the creeping improvements or declines in this situation, depending on your point-of-view. What could possibly replace “this AP cause” or fascination or occupation for us on both sides? I’m looking at this coldly and unemotionally, and just in terms of a hypothetical scenario of some approaching “AP apocalypse” cut-off day, instead of the creeping transition that is slowly happening.

Before I discuss the effects, the fallout, and impact of such a thing, in terms of what this picture would look like on the casino street level, should this happen, how would it happen?

Well…….suppose that some high-level board member of a gaming jurisdiction decided to hold a board meeting, and declared that this whole allowance or tolerance of certain “unacceptable” AP play actions is to be eliminated - and that can be easily done. And he also says that the industry’s handling and denial of this nagging “grey-area AP” problem is also an industry issue, too:

1. It is a charade, a small farce of both great cost and denial, and is fundamentally dishonest.
2. There is NO official public, or casino-level open policy on this at all, - nothing open about it - while back-offs, “black book” usage, “trespasses” and detentions are indeed real, and do occur at our casinos.
3. There is cost enough, in terms of industry losses that affect the industry.
4. That Blackjack teams, and now Baccarat teams, ply their trade.

And nobody present can easily falsify these claims, nor do they have solutions that seem to work.

He then says that the goal of this is to leave the casinos to the realms of non-AP recreational players, which is still 95% of the casino player population in any case. Many AP players may be forced to become “recreational” players instead of professional players, so to speak, and out goes any parasitic element. No one would ever again be backed off or walked out, or “trespassed,” and that the industry savings and good will would be immense. This Side Game Is OVER.

Before discussing the effects, he discusses an implementation plan for four “problem” of vulnerable table games: Blackjack, Three Card Poker, Baccarat, and Ultimate Texas Hold ‘em as the primary sources of “grey-AP” and “team” problems. And he says we will implement this to all related games in all casinos state-wide, and on one fell swoop or cut-off date. He also says that the effects will ONLY be noticeable or affect the “grey-level AP players and teams,” - while have NO real effect on “the straight up players,” when you think about it how they actually play, and that the proposed changes don’t really affect the non-AP social player.
He proposes:
For Blackjack only the following games to be offered
1. Shoe games 50% penetration max and only 3x spreads, but with good standard rules of H17, DOA, DAS, 3:2, using drop-in/pick-up full shoe shufflers to speed play and kill shuffle-tracking;
2. Introduces Ko’s “2 to 1” blackjack, where BJ’s are even money with a dealer’s 7 or more, but 2:1 on a 6 or less, having the BJ payout closely match the true count (A great anti-card counting version of BJ).
3. State of the art CSM machines of six decks.
4. Single deck all 6:5 and two rounds of play max, with single-deck shufflers.
5. Double deck 50% pen, with narrow limits and shufflers.
6. Same measures of Blackjack variants on a per-game type basis.
Pure lousy games for the AP Player, but not of importance, immaterial to the non-counter.

Three Card Poker:
Dealer’s hand stays in the I-deal machine until all players had decided to fold or play the hand, to stop “1-card poker” play, or slide a cut-card below the dealer’s hand packet before removing from the shuffler, if on the older Shufflemaster dispensers.

Baccarat:
No countable side bets allowed, unless protected by a “no side bet plays” when a yellow cut card comes out at 80% penetration.

UTH:
Mostly I-tables, to put an end to dealer errors, past-posting 2X or 4x, and pinching back 4x bets. Cannot be done on the electronic table display; bets are locked in or out without past-posting or pinching back bets as possible.
All other games remain the same. Keep in mind that we’ve been heading in that scary direction with CSM and I-tables. And he says that it is 90% a “game rule change and examination” kind of effort,- as surveillance and fancy game protection consultants haven’t really produced results that had always cut the mustard. Improvement, yes; full solution, no.

Now, what would the some gaming commission arguments be in justifying this unilateral action? Some ugly or relief-providing arguments and effects are here:
1. 90%+ of Blackjack play is from non-counters or ineffectual counters, yet the BJ tables hold in the single digits, largely because of the effective counters having an impact;
2. Huge savings from eliminating AP losses that is reflected in better comps, room rates, and facilities for all, in return it gives “straight up clean players” access to these improved comps, room rates, and facilities that AP had cost them;
3. If card-counting were gone overnight, you’d still have 90% of the players BJ with better table holds. Social players neither care about deck penetration, nor do they vary their bets much at all.
4. Most floormen couldn’t catch a card counter anyway if he bit him on his ass. So overnight, the average floorman would have increased his competency by 50% plus.
5. Surveillance can go back to lady-watching now – if these ladies are sticking electronic jammers into slot machines.
6. A Drop in lawsuits against casino operators on such things as improper detention, “black book” placements of players, and the like.
7. A drop in back offs and walk-outs incidents, and other ugly situations on the casino floor.
8. The AP Player publishing industry and expensive card-counting seminars would be hit hard, which is fine, as they were not friends of the industry.

I’m talking Overnight. Like a silent neutron that quietly kills not the AP player, but the ability and chance to carry out AP play - and to end that whole cat-and-mouse side-car end of the business. Now, I know many of you who know of me probably think that this must be one of my gaming industry fantasies, to delight in glee of some “magical and overnight genocide and disappearance” of all illicit AP low-lives, but that is not the case, knowing that you guys also do not believe this. I don’t hate counters or AP players, and had read books by outright and open casino cheats like Richard Marcus (of “American Roulette” fame); I detest weaknesses in the system, and finding ways to deny issues instead of fixing them. This is a bit like “not hating the burglar, but hating cheap locks on a door.”

In this regard, I also dislike stupid, arrogant and ineffective floormen, and sleeping surveillance workers, and view argumentative shot-taking players as low-lives, - with the counters as fallen bright guys who seek an unviable and unsustainable endeavor, a very fascinating but silly enterprise.

As for myself, I do my own AP play by simply using great strategy on Pai Gow Poker and Ultimate Texas Hold ‘em (my new addiction to my wife’s chagrin), and using odds on craps. Being a “White Hat” AP player of no grey area, - as I think of it. I don’t mind that the house actually has and some edge, as I pay the admission fee for my entertainment, - but prefer and accept a house edge of 0.5%, and not 16% within the house rules of a game, instead of getting +4% outside of the house rules.

As for AP Player catagories, there are three:
Black-ops AP player: capping, pinching bets; marking cards; hole-carding as opposed to taking advantage of a flashing dealer; electronics; working with a dealer on stacked decks. 100% illegal.
Grey-AP: legal but unethical, and against the house rules: card-counting, taking advantage of a newbie “flashing” dealer; claiming; accepting wrong payouts in one direction, as opposed to rejecting all “wrong” money.
White AP: Best strategy play, and always within house rules. A smart recreational player.
Non-AP: a ploppy.

Anyway, the poll is this:
Poll:
1. Abandon Casino gambling altogether aside from poker rooms and race books, where you are playing with a possibly profitable situation against lesser bettors.
2. Switch to absolutely maximal Dice play and UTH play.
3. Play the crappy blackjack games, as it is still blackjack, just without the ability for me to count now.
4. Throw in the towel.

If the casinos were able to truly end AP play, there would be no such thing as an advantage player. Like the 8 track player cassette salesman, like the telephone dial manufacturer, like the..... The ex AP player would need to find a new job. I think every AP player is aware that this may occur.

Butttttt..... I think the costs to the casino to thwart the VERY FEW true AP players will cost the casinos more than it will save them. If this was not the case I think all the anti AP actions you mention would have happened already. I think the cat and mouse game will continue.....

It's been said a million times, but I have to be the one million and first: If you are going to discuss AP, finally from a reasonable standpoint and not "destroy all that Boss doesn't like", you have to get your terms straight.
The categories are not as below:

Quote: Paigowdan

Black-ops AP player: capping, pinching bets; marking cards; hole-carding as opposed to taking advantage of a flashing dealer; electronics; working with a dealer on stacked decks. 100% illegal.
Grey-AP: legal but unethical, and against the house rules: card-counting, taking advantage of a newbie “flashing” dealer; claiming; accepting wrong payouts in one direction, as opposed to rejecting all “wrong” money.
White AP: Best strategy play, and always within house rules. A smart recreational player.
Non-AP: a ploppy.

If you are not playing at a monetary advantage, you are not an AP. Period. Recreation doesn't count, only cold hard cash.

Rather, the accepted categories are:
Black hat or cheater: capping, pinching bets; marking cards; electronics; working with a dealer on stacked decks; all other forms of collusion. Illegal, immoral.
These are not AP, they don't call themselves AP; this is all out criminal behavior.
Gray hat AP: hole-carding (without collusion); using certain exploits; taking advantage of systematic mistakes, "shot-taking". Usually legal, but immoral or morally gray.
White hat AP: card counting, advantage poker, identifying advantage games, using promotions to the maximum.
Non-AP: anyone playing at EV<0.

Quote: Paigowdan

Now, and as a hypothetical question, what would you do, as an avowed AP Player, if overnight the Gaming Commission unilaterally imposed on ALL casino operators that ALL Blackjack games must be made impossible to count?

As currently a generally white hat AP, I would sigh, look at my options, realize that I don't have a lot, so be forced to give up my moral high ground and move my play outside of NLH to gray hat territory.

The casinos best interest is to appear to swing a carrot not a stick.

Notice the word "appear". It's up to them to manage the carrot if they have good business sense.

Perhaps offering ap games and good comps, and then pulling them back, and reoffering.

They want good word of mouth too on their great game percentages, but they want to manage it too.

AP players just want good games for AP all the time, but if you're talking some sort of climate that works for the casino, that's probably close to it.

Quote: P90

Rather, the accepted categories are:
Black hat or cheater: capping, pinching bets; marking cards; electronics; working with a dealer on stacked decks; all other forms of collusion. Illegal, immoral.
These are not AP, they don't call themselves AP; this is all out criminal behavior.
Gray hat AP: hole-carding (without collusion); using certain exploits; taking advantage of systematic mistakes, "shot-taking". Usually legal, but immoral or morally gray.
White hat AP: card counting, advantage poker, identifying advantage games, using promotions to the maximum.
Non-AP: anyone playing at EV<0.

Sorry, Dan, I respect your ethical standards but I pretty much have the same view.

PS: didnt vote, seemed like sort of incomplete choices.

Quote: P90

It's been said a million times, but I have to be the one million and first: If you are going to discuss AP, finally from a reasonable standpoint and not "destroy all that Boss doesn't like", you have to get your terms straight.
The categories are not as below:

Quote: Paigowdan

Black-ops AP player: capping, pinching bets; marking cards; hole-carding as opposed to taking advantage of a flashing dealer; electronics; working with a dealer on stacked decks. 100% illegal.
Grey-AP: legal but unethical, and against the house rules: card-counting, taking advantage of a newbie “flashing” dealer; claiming; accepting wrong payouts in one direction, as opposed to rejecting all “wrong” money.
White AP: Best strategy play, and always within house rules. A smart recreational player.
Non-AP: a ploppy.

If you are not playing at a monetary advantage, you are not an AP. Period. Recreation doesn't count, only cold hard cash.

Rather, the accepted categories are:
Black hat or cheater: capping, pinching bets; marking cards; electronics; working with a dealer on stacked decks; all other forms of collusion. Illegal, immoral.
These are not AP, they don't call themselves AP; this is all out criminal behavior.
Gray hat AP: hole-carding (without collusion); using certain exploits; taking advantage of systematic mistakes, "shot-taking". Usually legal, but immoral or morally gray.
White hat AP: card counting, advantage poker, identifying advantage games, using promotions to the maximum.
Non-AP: anyone playing at EV<0.

This is where we differ, and we use different sets.
1. Black hat - we agree.
2. gray hat: we agree, with the exception of counting. This is because counting is considered wrong, not because it is against the state law, but against the house rules of play. Blackjack came to be as a game thought uncountable, only to be revealed a flawed game in HE protection. And the method to defeat BJ's HE and turn it upside down is a skilled procedural process of taking the steps to count, track, calculate, and act on, as a developed skill, and is against house rules; BJ was continued after Ed Thorpe revelation by casinos allowing the majority of players (non-counters) to play, while backing off and expelling counters who took advantage of a discovered "trap door," in order to keep the entenched and establish game viable.
And this is Not state or local law; the house rules of the casino house that one walks into, and then knowingly violates those same house rules by disallowed procedure, is unacceptable card-counting by the house rules. If you get backed off or 86-ed, obviously a house game rule was violated.
3. white hat: no action carried out that is against the house rules (of the house who is offering the game), and into whose casino house you walked into. Maximum allowed strategy play that is allowed by the house is fine (and BJ counting is not in this catagory); maximum promotion usage is fine, advantage poker play by skill, knowledge, and allowed concealment of your skills on a poker game - all fine.
4. EV < 0 can mean accepting an EV<0 and strong, perfect strategy play as per the game's design; I play maximum UTH, and face a 0.5% edge against me, considering the element of risk. I'm okay with that. I am not okay with breaking any game or house rule to obtain an EV>0

Quote: P90

As currently a generally white hat AP, I would sigh, look at my options, realize that I don't have a lot, so be forced to give up my moral high ground and move my play outside of NLH to gray hat territory.

Excellent and honest statement. I looked at various AP Methods plays, and those that caused trouble with an establishment, and whose door is slowly closing anyway, is the stuff I did reject. Best play I can do that is sanctioned by the house is the farthest I'd go. That's me, and with my dealing career, and later with my game design career, all this would have been shot to hell if I had been running around town running down tables.

I am not an AP and will never be one. There aren't very many "real" APs and I doubt there ever will be. I'm not for cheating but I am also not for making folks close down their brains just because they play a casino game.

Counting cards is not easy. I think the casinos are better off with a bunch of people playing on a table with decent rules that THINK they can count than without those folks. You know they type--heads out once or a few times a year, stops by here and other sites to get some counting tips, then hits the casino, counts okay for a while until the drinks kick in, and then promptly loses his bankroll.

Now he feels good about counting (it went well for a while) and he decides to try it again. He wins once in a while but loses more than he wins.

He's not an AP by any stretch but the whole myth of the AP makes him gamble more than he normally would.

I think the casinos make a mistake by making the games worse and trying to make them impossible to count. Counters who are actual AP players will take some money from the casino but there is way more money in those who think they can count but leave their bankroll to the casino every time.

If table game rules get as bad as slots have gotten, why play?

Put in good games, have good rules, provide good service, and your casino will make money even if an AP comes around once in a while. No bet/back off anyone that is really great at it...and drop comps for someone who does pretty well at it. You'll take away their tiny advantage and keep the others trying to get to that point...

I think you are overly concerned about a very few really good AP players. Variance will slam most everyone else.

Quote: odiousgambit

Sorry, Dan, I respect your ethical standards but I pretty much have the same view.

That's okay. I gotta say this: the "ethical end" kind of fell into place by looking at gamblers when I was getting into it. Love gambling, but I don't love all gamblers. And I question a focus on "tricks," for lack of a better description.

I didn't get involved with any game play that wasn't sanctioned by the gambling halls themselves, especially if it concerned a method that was also having the door closed on it. Just on a long term view, I saw it (trickery?) as going down a long path that I would have to back-track, and reverse out of, with so much lost later on to come. I look at counters who got burnt out, later to become everything from consultants to pitchmen for the casino operators they originally targeted for a take-downs, (like a strange act of treason) and I thought, "Let me get the colors of my hats right very early on," in a way giving myself a head start by never by getting into a position where I'd have to switch sides or directions.
I was both neutral, as well as lacking that "particular enthrallment" of the Robin hood AP view that the casinos are the bad guys. When you look at gambling, you're only looking at how the cards may honestly fall on a table, and keeping that the clean goal to be enforced, without any of this "I'm on the Red Team, and you're on the Blue team to be taken down" kind of attitude.

I've spotted floormen at casinos who were on Blackjack games counting, and thought it was kind of weird and nervy to try to pinch back money from an operator who's also paying them a legit salary to quash that exact kind of behavior. A bad and horrible mix there.

Another thing I found fascinating is that type of enthrallment with getting juice from scaming a casino in one way or another, and not from the real and straight play of the game. I enjoy straight-up games with money on the line, and wondered about the people who somehow "hook into" the juice of the illicit play.

Reading accounts of keith Taft, the MIT team, Ian Anderson, Nathanel Tilton, Max Rubin, etc., I really got a sense that their juice came from the whole illicit lifestyle and the massive cat-and-mouse side game of it all, and not actually "from gambling," or at least gambling that was on the table and by the book. There was just something that seemed so off-course about it all, especially Keith taft, a brilliant engineer who spent his time designing and building footwear-based electronics and software to maintain the running count of shoe games, and all the time and money spent out of real life, not on real gambling, but on the illicit side game. If he had focused on his legit engineer career, I could not imagine what he could have accomplished if focused on that, and was amazed by the loss and pain and the ultimate hell of that endeavor in the end. Now I don't want to hear what a great guy he was (I'm sure that he was), but it was not gambling, but an obsession, really.

Now this technology is appearing on the casino operators' side, to enforce legit games, and eventually the casino operators will win and eliminate anything short of sqeaky clean games that will be impossible to rig. If I had become acclimated - obsessed, focused, or reliant - on illicit AP that'll one day soon be shut down, I'd be a lost soul in the face of such pseudo-gambling affections - the side game stuff - when the door shuts.

As a dealer, I see so many of the true social and recreational gamblers, the ones who know how to play, but gamble as a part of an evening that is composed of dinner and a show, only to forget about gambling for real when they leave the place. They have careers in education, medicine, publishing, the film industry, you name it, and they don't count cards, and they don't think of casino operators as anything more than an entertainment provider, like movies or 4-star restaurants or travel, what have you. Certainly not some sort of Darth Vader run evil empire to be killed off. So after arguing about "nefarious play issues" here and what not, I think about these people, and I say, "My God, these people are normal, and have full lives, and they know nothing about card-counting, top Pai Gow Poker Strategy, optimal play on Ultimate texas Hold 'em, come bet progressions, etc." I know many of these people have never been here.

Now I wonder that in the future, when AP doors start shuting, some in a way will be holding the bag, a "what happened" kind of thing, "where did it go?" Thank goodness that straight dice, pai Gow poker, and UTH will be around. And on unfraudible frigging I-Tables. I'm thinking that we are a real minority in comparison to the social players.

Quote: Paigowdan

If you get backed off or 86-ed, obviously a house game rule was violated.

This has been discussed a lot of times. There's no contract signed stating "no counting", no placard stating that, it's just that casinos decide to ban players who cost them money.

Players have been banned for pure white hat play. Such as depositing into online casinos, rolling over the bonus and trying to cash out. Such as playing 100%+ return video poker in B&M casinos. Are they now gray hats because of that? No.

Software customers have had their licenses pulled and even been sued for violating legally void sections of EULA. Things like making backups, loading a program into a ramdrive for faster access, editing resource files to make it work on an updated OS. Clearly the software company considered it against their "house rules". Does that make these actions immoral?

No. Establishments don't get to decide what is moral and what is immoral. They may get to decide who they allow and who they don't, who they sue and who they don't, who's license they might pull - but they don't get to dictate the morals.

Card counters use the same information everyone else gets, do the same actions everyone else does, they just do them more rationally. The last part is what sets AP apart. If they were doing what everyone else does without that extra thinking, they wouldn't be advantage players, just players.

Quote: Paigowdan

Maximum allowed strategy play that is allowed by the house is fine ...
4. EV < 0 can mean accepting an EV<0 and strong, perfect strategy play as per the game's design; I play maximum UTH, and face a 0.5% edge against me, considering the element of risk. I'm okay with that.

Yes. But that's not advantage play. It's recreational play, even if good recreational play.

I would consider play with hard comps exceeding the -EV to be AP, but only that, not even soft comps count. Unless you're living for months on these soft comps alone - no rented apt, room to room - but that's difficult to pull even for a full-time AP.

Quote: Paigowdan

That's me, and with my dealing career, and later with my game design career, all this would have been shot to hell if I had been running around town running down tables.

Perhaps. But I personally don't have a dealer career, or game design career, my potential game designs are limited to public domain postings of ideas. I've had a completely unrelated career, but then lost my skilled day employment thanks almost directly to you-know-who [it-was-wrong-to-vote-for], and I need the money, and I need it now, and I need more than unskilled employment can bring in. If it can be done clean, that's how I try to do it, but if not, well, a man's got to do what a man's got to do. Your situation is very different, you have a whole two careers, each of which could be jeopardized by doing things casinos don't like, such as serious advantage play.

50% penetration and 3x max spreads?

Explain how fewer hands and smaller bets will aid casino profits?

Quote: P90

Quote: Paigowdan

If you get backed off or 86-ed, obviously a house game rule was violated.

This has been discussed a lot of times. There's no contract signed stating "no counting", no placard stating that, it's just that casinos decide to ban players who cost them money.

That's the problem. I'm begining to see that while there is an industry "denial" about the issue, but at the same time one cannot say it is not a VERY well known ground rule; the industry may point out that BJ AP sites and books devote so much to camoflage and cover that one cannot claim any sort of ignorance is good conscience. ["good conscience" on a gambling board....ahem]. You get backed off, you knew the deal going in, and what you were doing, and to a great degree, nothing needs to be said except "You of all people know have to behave yourselves. If you can count, you then you are an expert on OUR position."

Quote: P90

Players have been banned for pure white hat play. Such as depositing into online casinos, rolling over the bonus and trying to cash out. Such as playing 100%+ return video poker in B&M casinos. Are they now gray hats because of that? No.

No, they were simply suckers. I never used an online casino. Never trusted them, and I had a felt it was a real Caveat Emptor situation. To compare a regulated American Casino in a brick and mortar building with a physical address you visit, to a foreign Internet casino that comes to you over a tube was a ridiculous gamble - in a bad gamble way.

Quote: P90

Software customers have had their licenses pulled and even been sued for violating legally void sections of EULA. Things like making backups, loading a program into a ramdrive for faster access, editing resource files to make it work on an updated OS. Clearly the software company considered it against their "house rules". Does that make these actions immoral?

I offer no judgment on this, - did they read the fine print license agreements? Software customers.....?

Quote: P90

No. Establishments don't get to decide what is moral and what is immoral.

Sure they do, and apparently so. I certainly make the rules in my house and in my business; I call them guidelines. Sometimes I even call it the expectation of some simple home training. If you get asked to leave, you may indeed assume you did something that they found inappropriate, to your chagrin.

Quote: P90

To bad when They may get to decide who they allow and who they don't, who they sue and who they don't, who's license they might pull - but they don't get to dictate the morals.

If a casino can legally walk you off the premises, then they have dictated some morals and behavioral guidelines to you quite clearly. And you can tell them that card counting is also legal! And they will tell you good night and good luck, and if you come in again, you'll be wearing cuffs. I actually heard my shift manager tell this to an inappropriate player last week, one of three he tossed that night; two for drunkenness with dispicable behavior on the property. he dictated some morals to these men, and he did it to protect the business property that he was reponsible for. Good for him. Lord, do we spend more time on the Internet than in real casinos!

Quote: P90

Card counters use the same information everyone else gets, do the same actions everyone else does, they just do them more rationally. The last part is what sets AP apart. If they were doing what everyone else does without that extra thinking, they wouldn't be advantage players, just players.

No, apparently it does not work like that.
Card counting was originally implimented as a non-defeatable game, until Edward Thorpe revealed the game's "trap door" to the public.
Since the game was already entrenched, and since the house edge was needed to be able to offer the game while paying the light bills, casino operators decided to allow non-counting social players to play it, and profession players disallowed to play the game.
Furthermore, in order to successfully count down a shoe, one has to take fairly extrondinary steps to become adept at doing it; everything from accurate tracking of the card types (hi, low, 0) and constantly tallying their result, then dividing it by decks remaining to get the true count, then making appropriate bet raises to take advantage of this based on the true count, and doing this flawlessly to swing a -1% game to a +1% game, and using camoflage and false indications to hide what you're doing - because what you are doing is against the house rules. What you are doing is NOT using the same information that non-counters are using, along with advanced techniques of processing that the non-card counters are NOT employing. So it is NOT the same, and they may legally expel you for this, while you tell them "this is legal," while they legally tell you you're done for the night. And while you're waiting at a bus stop, and not in jail, - kicked out of the casino, you can say to your self: "But I was only using my brain, and it is also legal!!" Pure genius use of the brain.

Quote: P90

Yes. But that's not advantage play. It's recreational play, even if good recreational play.

No, see above.

Quote: P90

I would consider play with hard comps exceeding the -EV to be AP, but only that, not even soft comps count. Unless you're living for months on these soft comps alone - no rented apt, room to room - but that's difficult to pull even for a full-time AP.

And it will be gradually be getting tougher, too. A much less than brilliant career choice from using your brain. The point that I am trying to make is that if you are not an MIT wizard, or have the skills set of a Nathaniel Tilton, - do not try this at home.

Quote: P90

Perhaps. But I personally don't have a dealer career, or game design career, my potential game designs are limited to public domain postings of ideas. I've had a completely unrelated career, but then lost my skilled day employment thanks almost directly to you-know-who [it-was-wrong-to-vote-for], and I need the money, and I need it now, and I need more than unskilled employment can bring in.

But card-counting is NOT easy money, for those not at the level of the "greats," and it can lead to financial failure and bone-crushing depression.

Quote: P90

If it can be done clean, that's how I try to do it, but if not, well, a man's got to do what a man's got to do. Your situation is very different, you have a whole two careers, each of which could be jeopardized by doing things casinos don't like, such as serious advantage play.

1. I've made a few wise decisions, and
2. Kept a clean nose, and kept an ethical and reliable bearing in a rough business, and
3. Had some fortunate breaks with investors where I came through on things and the goods for them, and I really did a huge amount of work and study during VERY lean times. I never looked for questionable and difficult "Easy Money."
If you are in financial trouble, the last thing to do is to use casino card-counting as any form of unemployment insurance. Very sad to hear, but this is serious business, and that is good advice. Counting is not clean, and it jeopardizes gaming people on both sides of the fence. And it is in the process of fading. It is neither enjoyable or lucrative for most, and it is joyless but lucrative for MIT-level kids with super-computer brains. I have found that the easy money is actually the hard money, and the hard money was the bigger money after a LONG wait. I am at the point where I am concerned that I need to get away from gaming somewhat, the past seven years was way to deep.

Quote: Paigowdan

Quote: P90

Such as playing 100%+ return video poker in B&M casinos. Are they now gray hats because of that? No.

No, they were simply suckers. I never used an online casino. Never trusted them, and I had a felt it was a real Caveat Emptor situation. To compare a regulated American Casino in a brick and mortar building with a physical address you visit, to a foreign Internet casino that comes to you over a tube was a ridiculous gamble - in a bad gamble way.

You missed the part about video poker in Brick and Mortar casinos.

Quote: Paigowdan

Quote: P90

No. Establishments don't get to decide what is moral and what is immoral.

Sure they do, and apparently so.

No. They don't. The day they do, something will be very, very wrong with the world as we know it.

They might have the right to throw people out - in some jurisdictions - but that doesn't make these people's actions immoral.

If establishments had the authority to determine morality, then everyone speaking out against any wrong would be in the wrong himself. Every whistleblower ever, every dissident ever, and a lot of people who aren't, down to every student that ever corrected a teacher who didn't appreciate it.

Quote: Paigowdan

And while you're waiting at a bus stop, and not in jail, - kicked out of the casino, you can say to your self: "But I was only using my brain, and it is also legal!!" Pure genius use of the brain.

Perhaps, but everyone who is not waiting at a bus stop and won't be for a long time can also say the same - minus the sarcasm.

Quote: Paigowdan

If you are in financial trouble, the last thing to do is to use casino card-counting as any form of unemployment insurance. Very sad to hear, but this is serious business, and that is good advice.

It's not insurance anymore. That advice was due in 08, and it would not have been useful even then, not like I voted for Hussein.
For me it's mostly poker AP rather than BJ; but whenever I see greater EV to risk ratio against the house, I don't hesitate to take it. This is not a career choice for me, just a way to get back on my feet, and it turned out to work pretty well in terms of numbers. BJ isn't by far the best option at it, by the way, although it is the most morally unambiguous one.

deleted

Quote: MakingBook

50% penetration and 3x max spreads?

Explain how fewer hands and smaller bets will aid casino profits?

1. By using shoe shufflers. Take a new shoe out of the shuffler, and swap into the machine the old shoe, and cut and insert new block of cards; deal. The loss from manual shuffling is essentially eliminated. (but then there is the equipment cost.)
2. Not smaller bets/lower limits, but narrow ranges. We have players who flat-bet $5 or $10 hands all night, with $500 players also betting the same, and as long as possible. They should be on different tables of their own ranges. The average backjack table is $5 to $500, or $10 to $1000 dollars, a one-hundred fold range. Someone ranging 100x would be noticed quickly, but not one ranging 5 or 8 times. Most Non-counting players almost always stay within a very limited range.

Quote: Paigowdan

2. Not smaller bets/lower limits, but narrow ranges. We have players who flat-bet $5 or $10 hands all night, with $500 players also betting the same, and as long as possible. They should be on different tables of their own ranges.

So why aren't they? Seems like the sole reason casinos are keeping these $10-$1,000 tables is that the gain from ploppies who come in to flat-bet $10 and end up dropping $100 chasing losses exceeds the losses to counters, trackers and whoever else.

Spin it how you like, but as far as businesses go, even the cleaner casinos are gray hats as it is. Used to be outright black hat, some still are.

deleted

Quote: P90

No. Establishments don't get to decide what is moral and what is immoral.[Dan]: Sure they do, and apparently so.
No. They don't. The day they do, something will be very, very wrong with the world as we know it.

Establishments can indeed set limits on behavior, dress, etc., - "these moral things" - and for casinos, they can indeed limit and dictate what is acceptable and unacceptable for customers to practice or carry out on their table games.

Quote: P90

They might have the right to throw people out - in some jurisdictions - but that doesn't make these people's actions immoral.

Fine. Then let's just call it "instances of inappropriate behavior that is clearly unacceptable to the establishment - resulting in the ejection of the offender" - and this includes player practices and their game play methods on the establishment's gaming tables. Think about this: the casino determines the game rules, and enforces what is acceptable play according to these rules, - not the players. This is actually how it works. And most people have no problem with this. If you do, then you can call the local gaming control board with your issue.

Quote: P90

For me it's mostly poker AP rather than BJ; but whenever I see greater EV to risk ratio against the house, I don't hesitate to take it. This is not a career choice for me, just a way to get back on my feet, and it turned out to work pretty well in terms of numbers. BJ isn't by far the best option at it, by the way, although it is the most morally unambiguous one.

Gambling, even +EV AP play, is not a reliable or wise source of critical "life needs" income. Whether as a career, or even as a temp gig, gambling or AP play for survival money doesn't sound like a wise move, it honestly sounds distressed and unwise. Just me, my opinion

Quote: Paigowdan

Quote: P90

Card counters use the same information everyone else gets, do the same actions everyone else does, they just do them more rationally. The last part is what sets AP apart. If they were doing what everyone else does without that extra thinking, they wouldn't be advantage players, just players.

No, apparently it does not work like that.
Card counting was originally implimented as a non-defeatable game, until Edward Thorpe revealed the game's "trap door" to the public.
Since the game was already entrenched, and since the house edge was needed to be able to offer the game while paying the light bills, casino operators decided to allow non-counting social players to play it, and profession players disallowed to play the game.
Furthermore, in order to successfully count down a shoe, one has to take fairly extrondinary steps to become adept at doing it; everything from accurate tracking of the card types (hi, low, 0) and constantly tallying their result, then dividing it by decks remaining to get the true count, then making appropriate bet raises to take advantage of this based on the true count, and doing this flawlessly to swing a -1% game to a +1% game, and using camoflage and false indications to hide what you're doing - because what you are doing is against the house rules. What you are doing is NOT using the same information that non-counters are using, along with advanced techniques of processing that the non-card counters are NOT employing. So it is NOT the same, and they may legally expel you for this, while you tell them "this is legal," while they legally tell you you're done for the night. And while you're waiting at a bus stop, and not in jail, - kicked out of the casino, you can say to your self: "But I was only using my brain, and it is also legal!!" Pure genius use of the brain.

This argument is fallacious, as the information provided by the game itself is the same to both card counters and "ploppies". The decision on how you use this information is different in each case, but then as you yourself have just shown by your statements above... people take information in and process it differently. YOU CAN NOT REGULATE AGAINST that.

Cannot. You can stomp and shout and post long posts about it, but it's a simple matter. The game of blackjack provides information to the player, WITHIN the rules of the game. The player can use that however they so like. I have spent extraordinary measures getting better at many games I play. The difference is merely the score is kept in abstract points not concrete money. No-one has ever called me 'immoral' for being able to track cards in Tichu (it's not in the rules), calculating two-ply probabilities in various games or using deception and bluff in various war games. Not one of these rulebooks say I can or can not use these techniques, but in all cases it's seen as good play, not cheating.

If blackjack IS a game, then it has rules, and those rules form the basis of the game, NOT the tactics and strategy of the game. If it's not such a game, casino should stop call it 'gaming'.

The casino can stop players who are "too good". I won't play people at a couple of games as they are too good. It's no fun when they are beating my soundly. I wouldn't play them for money. It's not a moral decision though. And the casinos however do not have any moral superiority on deciding to back off a player who counts. It's like claiming a Monopoly player isn't allowed to bid extra for Orange properties, though they know that this property is more likely to be visited. Just because someone can use information better than another player (or better than originally intended) does not make their actions immoral when playing a game offered.

The casino can either change the rules (as you discussed) or back of "good" players. That's their choices. There's nothing wrong with either. But NOTHING about this makes card counting immoral, and calling it so, does not make it so. It's a business decision, a business practice.

The really good AP's will adapt and still find opportunities. The really good one find opportunities in many more casino games than you have mentioned here. Unfortunately I am not one of the really good ones with incredible mathematical abilities. Up until this year Card counting has accounted for 95% of my income, with the last few percent coming from what I call bonus chasing or bonus hustling. This year card counting is only accounting for roughly half my income, as I have concentrated more on the bonus chasing aspect, with results far above my expectation. I also began to play a second casino game at an advantage this year. This is a non card game. I had great success with this game, in the early part of the year with results far above expectation, but during the second half of the year, while still winning, my results have come down more in line with expectation. Unfortunately this is a game that the general public plays at very low limits, so betting any kind of real money stands out. Also I believe future opportunities for this game will come to a halt as there is an electronic version of the game by Azari, being introduced at casino, big, small, local, strip, downtown, all through out the Valley at a rather quick rate. The electronic version eliminates the human interaction which is where the un-randomness of the game came in and could provide an advantage.

Electronic versions of a number of different tables games are springing up all over at a really fast pace. Azari, makes electronic versions of Roulette, Craps, The Big Six Wheel and Blackjack. These are multiple station games, usually 5 or 6 seats, similar to a table, but just don't require a human dealer of even floor person to operate, so this should be a concern to casino employees as well as AP's. lol While 5 station blackjack games by Azari and another manufacturer (the one with multiple dealers, usually big breasted) have been around for a few years now, they seem to be catching on not nearly as quickly as the three other games I mentions. I feel like Electronic versions WILL replace roulette, craps, the big 6 wheel in the next year or two and begin to replace lower limit blackjack games ($5 and $10) at a slower pace. This is my biggest concern.

Now I want to speak specifically, of blackjack and card counting for which we have have a number of discussions and obviously have different views about. First of all, card counting has been pronounced dead more times than I can remember. Shoe games were going to eliminate card counting, continuous shuffle machines would eliminate card counting, 6-5 blackjack would eliminate card counting, various technology advancements like facial recognition software and easy access to data bases would spell the end of card counters. And yet here we are, some of the things that would spell the end of card counters have been around for a couple decades and both card counting and the cat and mouse game still exist.

The reason it still exists is because card counting is good for the casino's bottom line. 89% of card counters that are playing with an advantage are not making any kind of real money. They are playing small/medium stakes, mostly part-time and are making a few more bucks than they lose, IF they have the bankroll and mentality to survive the first negative swing that comes along. Another 10%, including myself are playing mid level stakes, spreading green to black, making some money. Maybe supplementing their income or maybe even making a mid five figure income, possibly touching six figures during an above expectation year. But for every one of the 99% of these two categories of players, there are many more would be, amateur, under-bankrolled or just bad counters that fail and the casino ends up taking there money just the same as any other player. Neither of these groups is hurting the casinos, nor effecting their bottom line and you can argue that when added in with all the unsuccessful counters previously mentioned, the group as a whole, including the 10% that I fall in, help the casino. The casino makes money off this group as a whole. There have been a number of casino consultants and experts that will tell you the best thing that happened to the casinos blackjack-wise in the last decade was the release of several different books and then the movie, '21' about the MIT blackjack teams. The casinos were over run with card counters who lost their shirts. lol

Ok, so that leaves us with 1%, and that number is probably way to high. These are the high stakes, well bankrolled solo and team players. This is the very small group that can effect the casino's bottom line a bit and this group, the teams, particularly is who the industry should concentrate on. If they focused only on this type of threat and stopped spending so much time, energy and resources on running skill checks and counting down decks, backing of and barring players spreading red and green that probably aren't financed enough to even play with an advantage, the casino's bottom line would improve a great deal.

deleted

Quote: P90

No. Establishments don't get to decide what is moral and what is immoral.

Quote: Paigowdan

Establishments can indeed set limits on behavior, dress, etc., - "these moral things" -

These are not moral things.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/moral#Adjective

1) Of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behaviour, especially for teaching right behaviour.
2) Conforming to a standard of right behaviour; sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgment.
3) Capable of right and wrong action.
4) Probable but not proved.
5) Positively affecting the mind, confidence, or will.

Are you confusing ethics and etiquette? The words sound kinda similar, but the meaning isn't. Dress code is etiquette. Handling your knife right is etiquette. Not stabbing people with it is ethics.

Quote: Paigowdan

Fine. Then let's just call it "instances of inappropriate behavior that is clearly unacceptable to the establishment - resulting in the ejection of the offender" -

- But you'll also have to apply this label to everyone else who displeases the establishment in one way or another. For instance, only playing video poker. Or talking bad about the ruling party or state religion - in a lot of regimes it did and does result in ejection of the offender from the material plane.

Quote: Paigowdan

Gambling, even +EV AP play, is not a reliable or wise source of critical "life needs" income. Whether as a career, or even as a temp gig, gambling or AP play for survival money doesn't sound like a wise move, it honestly sounds distressed and unwise. Just me, my opinion

There are very few well-paying jobs that don't, on a greater level, involve an element of gambling. I used to think I had one, but was proven wrong.

You gamble your time by studying academics at school hoping to get into college, or by working and getting life skills instead. You gamble a little when you take a test and aren't sure of the answer. You gamble big and straight up with dollars by dropping upwards of $100k on college, not to mention even more you could have earned in that time, for a chance to land a job that makes it back and more.
Then you gamble by pursuing a career as a skilled professional, pushing for management track, or going private and gambling even more money on that. If you don't go private, you gamble on what company to pick, a risky startup with high potential, a high-pay, high-demand job with high risk of being over your head, or a safe option that makes it harder to advance. And, every time you go for the high-risk, high-reward option, you also gamble on the 'rats not getting more power.

Direct gambling with +EV actually seems to have one of the lowest elements of risk - the millions of small gambles you make tend to average much closer to the expectation than the few big gambles of a professional career.

Quote: Paigowdan

No, apparently it does not work like that.
Card counting was originally implimented as a non-defeatable game, until Edward Thorpe revealed the game's "trap door" to the public.
Since the game was already entrenched, and since the house edge was needed to be able to offer the game while paying the light bills, casino operators decided to allow non-counting social players to play it, and profession players disallowed to play the game.
Furthermore, in order to successfully count down a shoe, one has to take fairly extrondinary steps to become adept at doing it; everything from accurate tracking of the card types (hi, low, 0) and constantly tallying their result, then dividing it by decks remaining to get the true count, then making appropriate bet raises to take advantage of this based on the true count, and doing this flawlessly to swing a -1% game to a +1% game, and using camoflage and false indications to hide what you're doing - because what you are doing is against the house rules. What you are doing is NOT using the same information that non-counters are using, along with advanced techniques of processing that the non-card counters are NOT employing. So it is NOT the same, and they may legally expel you for this, while you tell them "this is legal," while they legally tell you you're done for the night. And while you're waiting at a bus stop, and not in jail, - kicked out of the casino, you can say to your self: "But I was only using my brain, and it is also legal!!" Pure genius use of the brain.

Quote: thecesspit

This argument is fallacious, as the information provided by the game itself is the same to both card counters and "ploppies".

This is not fallacious, as the issue is not "whether or not the same information is available to all players," but how it is processed differently by different players, and to what extent is it processed. - Is the player using information of the discarded cards - to then detemine the probabilities of the cards to come out, to be now favorable to the player, - and if so, then is the player additionally changing is bet size, to take advantage of this? If yes, then the player has broken a game play rule, and will be flat betted or removed from the game. THAT is it in a nutshell.
Now as a response, the casino may send a floorman over to your table, tap you on the shoulder, and say, "Sorry, Sir, you are done for the night. We determine what is acceptable play, and what is unacceptable play, and we have determined that your play was unacceptable, and so you are done playing." And it is just as legal as it is for someone to have employed this AP method. This is what actually happens, this is what gets carry through, and it doesn't matter if you feel it is right or if it is wrong.

Quote: thecesspit

The decision on how you use this information is different in each case, but then as you yourself have just shown by your statements above... people take information in and process it differently. YOU CAN NOT REGULATE AGAINST that.

That is Correct - which is why card counting is totally legal. You cannot go to jail for card counting.
But it is also legal for a casino operator to determine what is, and what is not, acceptable game play at their facilities, which means you can get backed off, and that too is legal for them to do. In jurisdictions where you may stay and play, you may be looking at a 40% penetration shoe with narrow limits, also making it impossible to count.

Quote: thecesspit

The game of blackjack provides information to the player, WITHIN the rules of the game.

No, not if it outside of the casino's determination of what is acceptable game play for the game of blackjack.

Quote: thecesspit

The player can use that however they so like.

True. But the casino may respond if they do not like how you play, according to their house rules.

Quote: thecesspit

I have spent extraordinary measures getting better at many games I play. The difference is merely the score is kept in abstract points not concrete money. No-one has ever called me 'immoral' for being able to track cards in Tichu (it's not in the rules), calculating two-ply probabilities in various games or using deception and bluff in various war games. Not one of these rulebooks say I can or can not use these techniques, but in all cases it's seen as good play, not cheating.

In many cases it is fine AND acceptable play, indeed, to track discards for your benefit. I keep track of discards when I play Bridge - very fine to do for that game.

Quote: thecesspit

If blackjack IS a game, then it has rules, and those rules form the basis of the game, NOT the tactics and strategy of the game.

Your missing the overriding factor that house "rules of play" apply to the live table games they offer, and if they say that certain game play techniques are unacceptable at their tables, they may prevent you from playing. So, it is not only the base rules of the game, but the house rules on how the customers are allowd to play the game, in this case, blackjack.

Quote: thecesspit

If it's not such a game, casino should stop call it 'gaming'.

I don't think that they will, as many of their non-counting BJ playing customers still consider playing non-counting blackjack as gambling and gaming, and these non-card counting players are also given consideration to their wishes.

Quote: thecesspit

And the casinos however do not have any moral superiority on deciding to back off a player who counts.

No they don't, but they apparently have the legal authority to remove a player who counts.

Quote: thecesspit

The casino can either change the rules (as you discussed) or back of "good" players. That's their choices. There's nothing wrong with either. But NOTHING about this makes card counting immoral, and calling it so, does not make it so.

Well, I've always felt that if you don't play by the rules of a game, then you are being bad in some way.

Quote: thecesspit

It's a business decision, a business practice.

Oh, absolutely! Now what rational business would allow one or more of their tables to continuously hemorrhage losses. Obviously, they will set up rules to prevent this, in order to remain a viable business.

The divide is as large as the Internet/Real-World boundary. On the Internet there is NO P.A. and thats final.... there is only good luck/bad luck. There are a few "ZERO house edge" sites like betvoyager, but thats the nearest one gets to P.A. on the internet. Blackjack is heads-up and the cards are shuffled every round. There may be some places where penetration is allowed A.K.A. live-action, and I might have to eat my words about P.A. Even Craps is a heads-up game in a situation where multi-player gaming has NO effect on the outcome of the roll (Thus my signature question #2). And we've seen several Internet Poker "Houses" get into serious legal trouble/bad-faith situations.

The problem stems from taxation and "perhaps" a lack of collection. The US gummint WANTS that piece of that "taxation pie", unlike the UK. And the problem exists on both sides of this US scene.... The gummint wants taxation, and the Customers are trying to avoid/hide it. Considering the collection process of taxing only when one wins and denying/itemizing the losses does not seem fair to the casual gamer, yet favors the "high-stakes/high net-worth" gamer. We may be turning our backs on the latter, if popular sentiment has anything to do with this problem.

The problem stems from money-laundering, and the gummint's inability to "really" control it... analogous to Illegal Immigration, and Drugs. No one wants a Military prescence in every city to protect the citizens from sponsored terrorists acts of random violence in public. (But then, some people DO want to watch the world burn live on their Pads/celphones.)

Why am I slanting this way? Because of the LARGE amount of money involved... Either way good or evil, THAT much money can alter our lives.

deleted

Card counters aren't backed off because they are unethical scum or because they are breaking the rules.
They are backed off because they are winners(or the casinos perceive them as winners).

Ideally the casinos would like to disallow any action that shows a profit against them. New advantage plays have been discovered before and I'm sure more will be discovered in the future.

You are saying exploiting them is unethical simply because they don't want you to exploit them.

You've basically come just short of saying card counters are cheaters and winning is against the rules.

How about a choice (e) -- all the other advantage plays that you don't know about.

The hypothetical which you are proposing is impossible. There will always be advantage plays. There will always be new opportunities and smart players will figure them out long before the casino does. The casinos are always reactionary -- they don't protect against something until it has been done to death and well-publicized.

In the future, APs will be much more educated and sophisticated in the methods they use to beat casinos. The number of strong APs is exploding. Only the most uneducated AP still thinks of beating a casino as counting cards at blackjack. The opportunities for APs show no sign of slowing down, rather, these opportunities are accelerating. The future of game protection will most certainly involve educating casino management and game developers. But first, it has to involve these people recognizing that APs are legally beating their games. Without moralizing about cheating, these players are *legally* beating *all games*.

I am doing my best to head towards an educated future through my blog. But APs have a multitude of powerful methods I know nothing about.

There is no possible future where APs won't find bountiful highly lucrative opportunities.

If no-one ever won, the bookie would go broke - they love the advertising when there's a big winner (although obviously don't like paying out) but know in the end it makes them money.

I agree with some of your views that people should be banned for illegal activity, past-posting, cheating. I don't agree that anyone using intelligence, including watching and remembering cards, using promotions etc. is doing anything wrong - but I understand that casinos have the option to withdraw gaming opportunities to some people.

My personal opinion is that currently Blackjack is popular because there are some people who can win at it, and a hell of a lot more people who think they can count and beat it but fail. I believe it is more popular in the US, because people seem to know how to play it better.

If you have a promotion, say free buffet or "Ace in the hole", you have to accept that a small percentage will take the money - you cannot blame them. It's the same at Blackjack, if your surveillance is sufficient you can keep the numbers of APs down - give players a good game and low house edge; ensure the cheats and counters are kept to a minimum.

Personally if a casino can devise a non-countable Blackjack with a very low house edge, it is onto a winner. If casinos want to go down the line of other games with higher house edge, then I'll play them for fun but less often. I also think that limiting the spread would be a giant mistake - quite a lot of normal players push their luck or sometimes there's people playing £25 at a £2 table. Thus they would be preventing those players either playing or reducing the turnover for innocent players.

Quote: charliepatrick

If no-one ever won, the bookie would go broke - they love the advertising when there's a big winner (although obviously don't like paying out) but know in the end it makes them money.

I'm an ex-bookie, and you are 100% correct!

My philosophy was "a win is more likely than not to be a loan."

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

As always, players can also barr or back off the casino from being the advantage player they are also. Works both ways.

+1 Just like Television/Radio... there's still an off switch (appologies to Max Headroom).

Quote: charliepatrick

If no-one ever won, the bookie would go broke - they love the advertising when there's a big winner (although obviously don't like paying out) but know in the end it makes them money.

I agree with some of your views that people should be banned for illegal activity, past-posting, cheating. I don't agree that anyone using intelligence, including watching and remembering cards, using promotions etc. is doing anything wrong - but I understand that casinos have the option to withdraw gaming opportunities to some people.

My personal opinion is that currently Blackjack is popular because there are some people who can win at it, and a hell of a lot more people who think they can count and beat it but fail. I believe it is more popular in the US, because people seem to know how to play it better.

If you have a promotion, say free buffet or "Ace in the hole", you have to accept that a small percentage will take the money - you cannot blame them. It's the same at Blackjack, if your surveillance is sufficient you can keep the numbers of APs down - give players a good game and low house edge; ensure the cheats and counters are kept to a minimum.

Personally if a casino can devise a non-countable Blackjack with a very low house edge, it is onto a winner. If casinos want to go down the line of other games with higher house edge, then I'll play them for fun but less often. I also think that limiting the spread would be a giant mistake - quite a lot of normal players push their luck or sometimes there's people playing £25 at a £2 table. Thus they would be preventing those players either playing or reducing the turnover for innocent players.

Well, you favor using intelligence, and card counting because its not cheating or breaking the law. Thats NOT a promotion, nor should it look like it could be one. Keeping promotions minimized at low stakes seems reasonable, like the $5 match-play coupon. Keeping counters at a minimum, is an oxymoron to your own belief that intelligence-based AP is not cheating, yet you lump it in with promotions as a "Door-buster". Promotions (House Sponsored) and intelligence (Customer Sponsored) Advantages are indeed separate issues.

And BTW, shuffle after every deal does what you wish, so that means internet play. B&M casinos still can't match computer-chip speed. And basically what you want by your post IS no P.A.... just luck good/bad. Thats not a bad thing to ask for, a fair chance at a fair game IS the rule.

Quote: Paigowdan

3. white hat: no action carried out that is against the house rules (of the house who is offering the game), and into whose casino house you walked into. Maximum allowed strategy play that is allowed by the house is fine (and BJ counting is not in this catagory); maximum promotion usage is fine, advantage poker play by skill, knowledge, and allowed concealment of your skills on a poker game - all fine.

Should probably point out that "maximum promotion usage" will get your card frozen in most casinos, unless you have some -EV play or poker/sports to back it up. The former probably wouldn't be considered "maximum promotion usage" by most.

Quote: Paigowdan

4. EV < 0 can mean accepting an EV<0 and strong, perfect strategy play as per the game's design; I play maximum UTH, and face a 0.5% edge against me, considering the element of risk. I'm okay with that. I am not okay with breaking any game or house rule to obtain an EV>0

It doesn't matter. It's not AP. AP = advantage play. No advantage, it's not advantage play, just play.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Exactly. Casinos back them off because we are BETTER than the casino at blackjack and smartly don't want to play against us jus as I would NEVER play heads up poker against Phil Ivey. It has nothing to do with rules.

Oh, bull! You're not better than the casino at blackjack, you're better than the two-line algorithm set up to be slightly better than a savvy player if the cards were shuffled properly. Don't act like you've outwitted them when they've intentionally stunted their play just to give you a good gamble.

Quote: charliepatrick

If no-one ever won, the bookie would go broke - they love the advertising when there's a big winner (although obviously don't like paying out) but know in the end it makes them money.

Quote: MakingBook

I'm an ex-bookie, and you are 100% correct!

My philosophy was "a win is more likely than not to be a loan."

Hmm? I thought bookies, unless taken by surprise by demand, didn't actually lose any money to a big winner, just wound up paying them money they would have otherwise meted out in small chunks to all the people making the "sensible" bet. (Casinos are a different story, of course, and they like a big winner, too.)

I blame this whole thread on Evenbob. And me, to a small degree. I mean I am taking 12 credit, got a late start at classes due to going back to Baltimore to care for Josie's brother. Then a heart attack 2 weeks ago. Plus it was raining yesterday.

I was bored, no EvenBob to taunt, and decided to tweak Dan as the forum was getting boring. I am not a member of DT, which I am sure the posters there appreciate. I forgot that Dan is like the last preacher at my Pentecostal Church. Once he gets rolling on a sermon, there is no stopping him.

And not that he is a successful game inventor, he is like a Bishop with a bully pulpit. Using snide innuendo and shades of grey to lump counter in with cheaters and other lowlifes.

I have an essay due tomorrow and a quiz due by Midnight, so I will have to refrain from further comment momentarily. His venom is already spreading to posters questioning a noble profession like bookmaking. GRRRR

Quote: Paigowdan

This is not fallacious, as the issue is not "whether or not the same information is available to all players," but how it is processed differently by different players, and to what extent is it processed. - Is the player using information of the discarded cards - to then detemine the probabilities of the cards to come out, to be now favorable to the player, - and if so, then is the player additionally changing is bet size, to take advantage of this? If yes, then the player has broken a game play rule, and will be flat betted or removed from the game. THAT is it in a nutshell.

Again, show me the rules of blackjack available to the users. There is none. Unless the house will share it's rulebook (and the lips of the pit boss is not a rule book), the house can rant and rave till it's blue in the face about house rules and flat betting and tapping on the shoulder, but ultimately, that's all a smoke screen to cover ...

Quote:

Oh, absolutely! Now what rational business would allow one or more of their tables to continuously hemorrhage losses. Obviously, they will set up rules to prevent this, in order to remain a viable business.

... this. The casino can flat bet or expel a player because they are 'too good'.

Simple. The casino protects it's game by eliminating players who are too good for them under the game they spread.

I have never argued that they don't have this right. But all this logical gymnastics to cover this is pointless loops. It's like telling a bridge player "you can't track the discards to play with me". You'd be laughed at by good players. You can say "sorry, your too good for me, not going to play for money tonight!".

Easy simple. Everything else is smoke and mirrors.

Quote: Buzzard

I forgot that Dan is like the last preacher at my Pentecostal Church. Once he gets rolling on a sermon, there is no stopping him.

Oh, you knew. It was a successful troll. Don't deny it :)

Normally I hate these hijacks, but, in this case, wasn't the original question completely answered by Dan on the first page? The game is licensed. No one likes it and it's not installed anywhere. What else do you want to know?

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

Oh, you knew. It was a successful troll. Don't deny it :)

Normally I hate these hijacks, but, in this case, wasn't the original question completely answered by Dan on the first page? The game is licensed. No one likes it and it's not installed anywhere. What else do you want to know?

Hey, this is a new thread. Nothing was hi-jacked. I knew I would get a reply. I did not expect a master plan for a new world order in all existing casinos. LOL I was really really bored, Ok

Quote: Buzzard

Hey, this is a new thread. Nothing was hi-jacked. I knew I would get a reply. I did not expect a master plan for a new world order in all existing casinos. LOL I was really really bored, Ok

Oh, sorry, I thought we were on the Pai Gow Peek thread. You totally hijacked that one :)

I don't even know which thread I'm on any more...

I just went over and checked that thread. Dan says i can PM him and try and change his mind if I want to. ROFLMAO

I would have a better chance of getting EvenBob to agree that Obama was the better choice !

deleted

Quote: SOOPOO

The costs to the casino to thwart the VERY FEW true AP players will cost the casinos more than it will save them. If this was not the case I think all the anti AP actions you mention would have happened already. I think the cat and mouse game will continue.....

Much of the hoopla is generated to exert a deterrent effect against those would think of starting any sort advantage play, either legal, illegal or undeterminable.

Quote: Buzzard

I blame this whole thread on Evenbob. And me, to a small degree. I mean I am taking 12 credit, got a late start at classes due to going back to Baltimore to care for Josie's brother. Then a heart attack 2 weeks ago. Plus it was raining yesterday.

I was bored, no EvenBob to taunt, and decided to tweak Dan as the forum was getting boring. I am not a member of DT, which I am sure the posters there appreciate. I forgot that Dan is like the last preacher at my Pentecostal Church. Once he gets rolling on a sermon, there is no stopping him.

And not that he is a successful game inventor, he is like a Bishop with a bully pulpit. Using snide innuendo and shades of grey to lump counter in with cheaters and other lowlifes.

I have an essay due tomorrow and a quiz due by Midnight, so I will have to refrain from further comment momentarily. His venom is already spreading to posters questioning a noble profession like bookmaking. GRRRR

Buzzard,
You spend a lot of time taking shots at me. I will say that the time I spend here is mostly focus on game design, the future of gaming, and issues of AP play. Except for the time I take to respond to your shots and tweaks.
Now, Buzzard, while you seldom write a post that has any gaming or gambling related content or weight to it, you can't seem to write a post that doesn't have some sort of fixation on me, which I find, excessive, strange, and creepy on your part.

As for this thread, Yes, I started it, developed it, and contributed to it, but it is not a sermon, - it was a Gambling related debate until you came along. This area of gaming is a simply interest of mine, and where we discuss differences on this subject with the other, more serious members.

You cannot take any credit for any real gaming contributions to this thread, ("I blame this whole thread on EvenBob and me...") because you were irrelevant to this thread. (And I can actually extend that a bit further, too, Charles)
Your posts usually contribute little insight to Gaming issues, but are generally heavily fixated on me, often with religious overtones ("Dan is like a Bishop with a bully pulpit..." Dan this, Dan that, or: "When Dan gets rolling on a sermon").
Buzzard, I want you to write and post threads that do not have any excessive personal interest in me. I want you to discuss gambling and gaming intelligently.

Hole carding and counting are not gray areas,
They are green areas,and casinos love the business that rumors of winners and pros bring in,
As long as no laws are violated, these are part of the game,
And can be controlled completely.
They need security to watch the dealers and staff as much as the players...
There is not a lot of money lost to AP compared to the gain.
if AP play ends it means that humans have evolved into a new species.
I learned how to count cards in elementary school
and I have three cousins memorizing indexes while I wait for them to turn 21.
The future is so bright I gotta wear shades
8)

Quote: thecesspit

Again, show me the rules of blackjack available to the users. There is none.

There is a lot of internal documentation on blackjack operations and procedures, but it is not available to the general public. You cannot walk into the management office areas of the casino, and say "Show me your documentation, I want to read it!" - unless your a State gaming agent.

[Dan=Now what rational business would allow one or more of their tables to continuously hemorrhage losses. Obviously, they will set up rules to prevent this, in order to remain a viable business.]

This doesn't mean that the player is "too good." This means that NEW games cannot get approved and used without them always having a protective house edge. It also means, in the case of Blackjack and it "trap door" of counting, where the house edge was discovered to be vulnerable, the casinos have game-play flat bet and back-off rules to protect the game's house edge from counters.

Quote: thecesspit

Simple. The casino protects it's game by eliminating players who are too good for them under the game they spread.

No. The casinos protect their games by eliminating the players who try to destroy Blackjack's House edge by counting down shoes, which is also known to be against the house rules. Breaking the house rules is what really gets plays in trouble and thrown off games, not being too lucky or "too good." When was the last time you heard of someone being thrown off Roulette for being too good?

Quote: thecesspit

I have never argued that they don't have this right. But all this logical gymnastics to cover this is pointless loops. It's like telling a bridge player "you can't track the discards to play with me".

No it's not. I track cards ALL the time when I play bridge, - where you are supposed to track cards - and not when I play Blackjack, when I am not supposed to count cards. I simply follow the rules of the game.

Quote: WongBo

Hole carding and counting are not gray areas,
They are green areas,and casinos love the business that rumors of winners and pros bring in,

Some casinos DO try to use the lure of "Really Great rules - almost countable shoes!" as a business lures. Some casinos don't. Mixed bag.

Quote: WongBo

As long as no laws are violated, these are part of the game,
And can be controlled completely.
They need security to watch the dealers and staff as much as the players...
There is not a lot of money lost to AP compared to the gain.

If I worked surveillance, I'd watch employees just as hard. Some places can make AP-lured games profitable, some had this plan kill them.

Quote: WongBo

if AP play ends it means that humans have evolved into a new species.

Man, do I agree!

Quote: WongBo

I learned how to count cards in elementary school
and I have three cousins memorizing indexes while I wait for them to turn 21.
The future is so bright I gotta wear shades
8)

I'm glad somebody is optimistic. I think the Apocalypse is coming

Quote: Paigowdan

There is a lot of internal documentation on blackjack operations and procedures, but it is not available to the general public. You cannot walk into the management office areas of the casino, and say "Show me your documentation, I want to read it!" - unless your a State gaming agent.

They can have all the internal documentation they want. If they are not published as part of the rules of the game, then violating them is not cheating.

Take a step back, and look at what you are saying. You are saying that there are some unpublished rules somewhere, and the players are simply supposed to make educated guesses as to what they might or might not be, and then follow them? And, if they guess wrong, you brand them "cheaters"? That's ridiculous.

deleted

You love to say that. But without this "paranoia," there would be no blackjack. You've convinced yourself people don't count because they're simply not of your mental caliber. But the fact is, it's ridiculously easy. I know the count most of the time if I'm playing, and I'm a flat bettor. The reason I don't really vary my bets with it is that I want to stay in the house's good graces. If the house does not take measures against counting, the games don't get hosted. Period.

It may be (okay, it definitely is) that the knowledge that counting is possible helps the take in blackjack, but that is exactly because they fight it in reality.

Quote:

No it's not. I track cards ALL the time when I play bridge, - where you are supposed to track cards - and not when I play Blackjack, when I am not supposed to count cards. I simply follow the rules of the game.

Okay, where is it written you can track the cards in bridge?

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

They can have all the internal documentation they want. If they are not published as part of the rules of the game, then violating them is not cheating.

All, or almost all Business have written documents generally called Internal Controls, which supervisors and managers follow and implement. In the cases of casinos, floor supervisors and above follow and implement these controls for table games, with items covering Advantage Play to include handling card counters. Likewise, in the food service side of the casino, the food service manager or Buffet Manager has guidelines to prevent patrons from sneaking in additional guests, or handling people who pack their own doggie or "take-out bags" of Buffet food using Tupperware containers. Customers who violate these controls are considered to have committed "Theft of Services" - stealing or cheating from our point of view, if you will. Now, since these Internal Control documents and procedures are not a part of the State Legislature or State Law, these "theft of services" acts may be legal - the offender gets no arrest or jail time - but at the same time we may also legally use our business guidelines to deny entrance or access to services for anyone who violates our Internal Controls, especially when it concerns Loss Prevention. Somebody sneaking in extra guests may be escorted out of the buffet or premises, and someone who counts cards may be escorted out of the casino or premises. All legal, and for all parties concerned.

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

Take a step back, and look at what you are saying. You are saying that there are some unpublished rules somewhere, and the players are simply supposed to make educated guesses as to what they might or might not be, and then follow them? And, if they guess wrong, you brand them "cheaters"? That's ridiculous.

No, I am not saying that. What I am saying is that there are Internal controls in place to stem losses on the basis of valid Loss Prevention guidelines for the business. And customers don't have "to guess at" that whatever they may be doing is wrong. If they do something, anything, with thought and intention that scams the house, - carries out theft of services - then the premise is that they knew what they were doing along! (And they cannot respond with, "Okay - Now SHOW me were it is written THAT I cannot commit theft of services in such a way!") All the business has to do is show you the door. This is particularly true with card counting, which has extensive practices on camoflage and deception against casino personnel, along with its base method of mathematical counting that is very deliberate and elaborate.
And to use more polite language, we can refer to someone who took a shot at the Buffet as "committing theft of services" instead of stealing food, and the same can be said in the casino pit: a card counter or cheater or anyone who breaks the "house rules' - "Loss Prevention Guidelines" - as committing Theft of Services instead, if that sounds better, regardless of how it is viewed by state law, as the law also allows for expulsion of those who commit theft of services.
Now since the house edges on tables games are required by gaming law (a game's house edge is a part of game characteristics for gaming, although blackjack may clearly predate the Gaming Commission in that case), house edges must be defended by the Loss Prevention Protocol of a casino business. Anything the breaches the House edge (capping and pinching bets, marking cards, hole carding, and yes, even card counting can destroy a casino's house edge on a game), is considered "theft of services" against the business, with the right of expulsion, regardless of its legal status by the state.

I personally enjoy the cat and mouse game (from the casino side) and feel no animosity towards card counters.

The one argument that I think Dan is forgetting is that card counting is technically "illegal". The gaming commission's stipulate that if you are using a device to track the count, it is illegal. The difference is that when you are counting using your own memory, there is technically no way to 100% prove that the player is tracking the count. Without that proof, there is no way to prosecute since the player could always claim that it was only a coincidence that their wagers fluctuated with the change in the count.

That being said, I don't agree with that statement. Counting cards is merely a flaw in the design of the game and if the casino opts to offer this game (with its known flaw) then it is up to the casino to identify those players that are aware of the flaw and are taking advantage of it. I understand Dan's statement that when the game was initially created it was thought to not have this weakness, but most games out there have flaws that were not understood when they were created. The fault (and responsibility) lies with the game designers and casinos that offer these flawed games. If a person you know offers to make a bet with you and you know for a fact that they are wrong and take that bet knowing you will win, the fault lies with the person that went into the wager with the flawed information, not the person that took advantage of their ignorance.

So to the card counters out there: play away and good luck. Just know that I'm not one of those "sleepy surveillance guys" and I'll be watching for you ;)
No hard feelings when I find you, that is just the game we are playing with each other.